Geocaching Australia

Big Matt and Shell wrote:I was refering to Garmin US @ $22 with a dollar for dollar exchange rate (well almost) you think they would be at parity.

As CR points out that is not allways the case.

Logistic costs in Australia are way higher than in the US / Europe hence everything is so expensive downunder.

Philipp wrote:

Big Matt and Shell wrote:I was refering to Garmin US @ $22 with a dollar for dollar exchange rate (well almost) you think they would be at parity.

As CR points out that is not allways the case.

Logistic costs in Australia are way higher than in the US / Europe hence everything is so expensive downunder.

Compare the price of an Oregon 550, about US$440 in the US and just under AUD$600 here.

that goes for everything: Martina is ordering her iPad out of the US - I just ordered a Canon D10 >> we save hundreds of $$$ on each item. Sure the not adjusted exchange rate is an issue however OZ was never cheap.

I found (FTF!!! ...with some help from Ruffasgutts4x4 and his Oregon ) the first Sydney Chirp cache today by Steeba. Good fun and the novilty was great, but really it didnt do much a dog tag with the next waypoint co-ords couldnt have... except save you typing the next waypoint in as once found you can simply hit the GO Button and you are off to GZ. It also had to be listed as a mystery, where it is clearly a multi. I suppose you can get around this by hiding BOTH the Chirp, and a Physical Tag... but then why bother with the expensive Chirp?

A question for TheUmp and iRiblit, does the proximity rule still apply when placing a Chirp; ie, seeing as there is nothing that has to be physically found, can you place the Chirp closer than 160m to a physical cache?

My Chirps arrived this morning, and whilst playing with one now I decided it could be a cool idea to have one sitting on my office window sill. However, there is a multi cache 70m away

Hoojar wrote:... seeing as there is nothing that has to be physically found ...

Since when is a chirp not physical any more? That sound like bending the rules since a chirp is way larger than a standard nano.

Philipp wrote:

Hoojar wrote:... seeing as there is nothing that has to be physically found ...

Since when is a chirp not physical any more? That sound like bending the rules since a chirp is way larger than a standard nano.

You are not required to find the physical chirp -
just the info it broadcasts - like reading info on a plaque.
The intent of the 160m rule is so people don't find the wrong physical caching object and there is no change of that happening here.

SamWalkers wrote:

Philipp wrote:

Hoojar wrote:... seeing as there is nothing that has to be physically found ...

Since when is a chirp not physical any more? That sound like bending the rules since a chirp is way larger than a standard nano.

You are not required to find the physical chirp -
just the info it broadcasts - like reading info on a plaque.
The intent of the 160m rule is so people don't find the wrong physical caching object and there is no change of that happening here.

I'm glad that at least one person thinks along the same lines as I do!

Don't count on someone not finding and dismantling your chirp if you do put it close to another waypoint!

Damo. wrote:Don't count on someone not finding and dismantling your chirp if you do put it close to another waypoint!

I'd hope that no one in this forum would even think along those lines...

Purposely? No.

BUT ... if it is too close and someone else finds it thinking they're looking at a waypoint for another cache, they may be inclined to take it apart to get the information out of it.

It's a risk, but a small one.

caughtatwork wrote:Purposely? No.

BUT ... if it is too close and someone else finds it thinking they're looking at a waypoint for another cache, they may be inclined to take it apart to get the information out of it.

It's a risk, but a small one.

Yes. I wasn't suggesting they would do it maliciously.

People sometimes don't read cache descriptions and/or go to quite some effort to find something at gz/waypoints even if the description says otherwise.

SamWalkers wrote: You are not required to find the physical chirp -
just the info it broadcasts - like reading info on a plaque.
The intent of the 160m rule is so people don't find the wrong physical caching object and there is no change of that happening here.

If the 160m rules doesn't apply to chirp then you could put two on top of each other ... which doesn't work.
>> If you place something physical out there it is a "stage of a multicache" no matter how that object has to be found / how the cacher has to interact with it.

Philipp wrote:

SamWalkers wrote: You are not required to find the physical chirp -
just the info it broadcasts - like reading info on a plaque.
The intent of the 160m rule is so people don't find the wrong physical caching object and there is no change of that happening here.

If the 160m rules doesn't apply to chirp then you could put two on top of each other ... which doesn't work.
>> If you place something physical out there it is a "stage of a multicache" no matter how that object has to be found / how the cacher has to interact with it.

Yep, even Philma's classic Sydney CBD Co-Ord Hides, which are super tiny and immovable, and never could be confused for anything but his waypoints, command a 160m exclusion zone. As soon as you 'add' ANYTHING it gets / has to have its own zone... odd with the accuracy of GPSr's these days but I dont see GS changing tune soon. Would set a nasty precedent for decreasing the exclusion zone of caches in general which would be awful!

Just created my first "chirp" cache. Its a GCA only cache.

http://geocaching.com.au/cache/ga2948